Should Ukraine accept these Russian demands? Wouldn't their rejection only lead to more death and destruction and the loss of even more territory in view of Russia's advance?
- Wolfgang Lieberknecht
- 3. Juni
- 10 Min. Lesezeit
Aktualisiert: 4. Juni
Should Ukraine accept these Russian demands? Would rejecting them not only lead to more death and destruction and the loss of even more territory in view of Russia's advance?
The Russian peace proposals and our opinion on them, which we would like to discuss with you. If you agree with the text, you can sign it. We propose sending it to the British government, the political parties and, as citizens, to the members of parliament representing your constituencies, and perhaps seeking public discussion with them. If there are good objections, we will revise this proposal until we arrive at a final version. If you like the idea, please share the text and encourage discussion.
The Russian proposals from the dpa text: Russland veröffentlicht Plan für eine „Friedenslösung“
The demands presented by Russia are consistent with its previous demands: internationally binding recognition that the Crimean Peninsula and the regions of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhya are part of the Russian Federation; neutrality and non-alignment – meaning a binding renunciation of NATO membership, among other things; confirmation of Ukraine's nuclear-free status and a limit on the number of Ukrainian soldiers; Dissolution of nationalist military groups and the National Guard; protection of the minority rights of the Russian and Russian-speaking population and recognition of Russian as an official language; lifting of all sanctions and resumption of diplomatic relations; resumption of gas transit through Ukraine to Europe; conclusion of a peace treaty, which must be confirmed by a legally binding UN resolution after signing.
Our opinion on Russia's demands: what do you think and say?
Accept them and thus end the war and its risks and negative consequences for all of us?
German media are putting pressure on Ukraine not to accept this, commenting that it would be surrender. But in doing so, they contradict their own assessments that Russia wants to take over the whole of Ukraine and threaten and conquer other European states. However, there is nothing to suggest this in the demands. If these claims were ever meant seriously, then the Russian demands are moderate and a compromise. The remaining Ukraine would be confirmed within its new borders under international law.
Moreover, journalists and politicians can easily argue against accepting the demands; they are not the ones dying in the trenches.
For us, acceptance would be good because it reduces the risk of world war and also keeps warmongers like Macron, Stahmer and Merz on a leash.
It would be good for us because it could stop the arms race that is being justified by an alleged Russian threat. It would be good for Europe's economy because Russian gas would reduce production costs in Europe and ease the burden on people's households and the federal budget.
The dissolution of National Socialist groups would also be important for Europe, because otherwise they would pose a permanent threat to the whole of Europe.
It would be good for Ukraine because the destruction would stop and there would be no more loss of life, and for the many people who would continue to live. And it would be good for Ukraine because it would retain many cities and regions and access to the Black Sea via Odessa. It would probably lose all of this if the war continued, given the military superiority of the Russian army.
We should already now – but certainly after a ceasefire – return to the idea of the UN Charter and the Charter of Paris, secure peace through dialogue and build or strengthen joint institutions: the UN and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe. We citizens should contribute to this by understanding the different interests of the parties to the conflict and by helping to find compromises. In addition, we should build as many personal connections as possible between people in the countries involved in the conflict as a foundation for peace; we can and should all contribute to this ourselves! We should put the idea of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights back at the centre of our thinking: we should see ourselves as members of one human family and resolve our conflicts only by peaceful means.
We should therefore call on the British government and MPs to advise the Ukrainian government to agree to the demands. Declare that you will not supply any more weapons or funds because, in our view, the demands could be accepted and the war ended. Continuing the war will only lead to even worse conditions for Ukraine. And we should demand that they work to strengthen the UN and respect the UN Charter, and promote civil partnerships.
Wolfgang Lieberknecht, Wanfried (IFFW), Dominik Hölzer, Sammlungsbewegung aufstehen-Ortsgruppe Diez – Limburg; Uwe Kempe, Mühlhausen,
info@internationale-friedensfabrik-wanfried.org 0176-43773328
𝐑𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐬 𝐌𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐦, 𝐈𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐛𝐮𝐥 𝟏. 𝐉𝐮𝐧𝐢 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓
Russian memorandum translated by DeepSeek (see original text in the comments below):
Page 1
Proposals of the Russian Federation (Memorandum)
on the settlement of the Ukraine crisis
Section 1
Basic parameters of a final settlement
1. International legal recognition of the incorporation of Crimea, the LNR, the DNR and the Zaporizhzhya and Kherson regions into the Russian Federation; complete withdrawal of units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (VSU) and other Ukrainian paramilitary formations from these territories.
2. Neutrality of Ukraine, including renunciation of accession to military alliances and coalitions, as well as a ban on military activities of third states on Ukrainian territory, including the deployment of foreign armed forces and military infrastructure;
3. Termination and future renunciation of international treaties or agreements that contradict the provisions of point 2 of this section;
4. Confirmation of Ukraine's status as a state without nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction (WMD), with an explicit ban on the acquisition, transit or deployment of such weapons on Ukrainian territory;
5. Establishment of upper limits on the strength of the VSU and other Ukrainian military formations, on the number of weapons and military equipment, and on their permissible specifications; dissolution of Ukrainian nationalist formations within the VSU and the National Guard;
6. Guarantee of full rights, freedoms and interests of the Russian and Russian-speaking population; granting of official language status to the Russian language;
7. Legal prohibition of the glorification and propaganda of Nazism and neo-Nazism; dissolution of nationalist organisations and parties;
8. Lifting of all existing economic sanctions, bans and restrictions between the Russian Federation and Ukraine and renunciation of new ones;
9. Settlement of issues related to family reunification and the free movement of persons;
10. Renunciation of mutual claims for damage caused by acts of war;
11. Lifting of restrictions on the UOC (Ukrainian Orthodox Church);
12. Gradual restoration of diplomatic and economic relations (including gas transit), transport and other traffic, including with third countries;
Section II
Conditions for the ceasefire
Option 1.
Start of the complete withdrawal of Ukrainian armed forces (VSU) and other Ukrainian paramilitary formations from the territory of the Russian Federation, including the DPR, LPR, the Zaporizhzhya and Kherson regions, and their retreat to a distance agreed by the parties from the borders of the Russian Federation, in accordance with the approved provisions.
Option 2. ‘Package proposals’:
1. Prohibition on the deployment of the VSU and other Ukrainian paramilitary formations, except for movements for the purpose of withdrawal to a distance agreed by the parties from the borders of the Russian Federation;
2. Suspension of mobilisation and start of demobilisation;
3. Cessation of foreign supplies of military products and foreign military assistance to Ukraine, including the provision of satellite communication services and the provision of reconnaissance data;
4. Exclusion of the military presence of third countries on Ukrainian territory, cessation of the participation of foreign specialists in hostilities on the side of Ukraine;
5. Guarantee that Ukraine will refrain from sabotage and underground activities against the Russian Federation and its citizens;
6. Establishment of a bilateral centre for monitoring and control of the ceasefire regime;
7. Mutual amnesty for ‘politically excluded persons’ and release of detained civilians;
8. Lifting of martial law in Ukraine;
Page 3
9.) Announcement of the date for the election of the President of Ukraine and the Verkhovna Rada, which must take place no later than 100 days after the lifting of martial law.
10. Signing of an agreement on the implementation of the provisions contained in Section I.
Section III
Sequence of steps and timetable for their implementation
1. Start of work on the text of the agreement;
2. Declaration of a 2-3 day ceasefire for the recovery of bodies in the ‘grey zone’;
3. Unilateral handover by the Russian Federation of 6,000 bodies of members of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU);
4. Signing of a memorandum on the ceasefire with specific deadlines for the fulfilment of all its provisions and setting of the date for the signing of the future agreement on the final settlement (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Agreement’);
5. A 30-day ceasefire will be introduced with the start of the withdrawal of the VSU. The complete withdrawal of VSU units from the territory of the Russian Federation and the full implementation of the ‘package agreement’ must take place within these 30 days;
6. Holding of elections and formation of government bodies on the territory of Ukraine;
7. Signing of the agreement;
8. Approval of the signed agreement by a legally binding resolution of the UN Security Council;
9. Ratification, entry into force and implementation of the agreement.
Source of copies of the memorandum:
Переговоры России и Украины в Стамбуле
Neutrality of Ukraine and recognition of Donbass and Novorossiya. Main provisions of the memorandum of the Russian Federation
(Talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul
Neutrality of Ukraine and recognition of Donbass and Novorossiya. Main provisions of the memorandum of the Russian Federation=
Taurus delivery: With this decision, the German government could drag Germany and Europe into a war with Russia. Can those who do not want war still stop it? Let's think about it and talk!
Will missiles soon be striking from Russia? The risk is increasing every day. If Ukraine strikes Russian territory with German Taurus cruise missiles, that could be the end. Since the German government is no longer talking about whether it will deliver or has delivered, Russia can expect a Taurus attack at any time, even on the Kremlin, which would be almost impossible to defend against. Possible counterstrikes or even preventive attacks are therefore being discussed in Russia. Ukraine has apparently already fired on a helicopter in which Putin was sitting or in which the Ukrainian government believed President Putin was sitting.
We recommend these activities if you are also against the war spreading to Germany and want to actively help prevent this from happening.
The BSW proposes a referendum on Ukraine policy. A good idea, but only sensible under two conditions: a) Referendums are possible under the Basic Law:Art 20 GG - Individual norm - Laws on the Internet "(1) The Federal Republic of Germany is a democratic and social federal state. (2) All state authority is derived from the people. It is exercised by the people through elections and referendums and through special bodies of the legislature, the executive and the judiciary." However, there is currently no implementing law for referendums on federal matters such as foreign policy.
b) A majority of citizens seem to support the escalation of the federal government's policy in Ukraine. At least, that is what Die Welt reports: internationale-friedensfabrik-wanfried.org/post/eine-mehrheit-der-deutschen-will-merz-in-den-krieg-folgen-oder-sieht-das-risiko-nicht-wie-bekommen.
Only parliament can pass an implementing law (perhaps the Bundesrat is also required, which would need to be investigated). In any case, it would have to be decided by the politicians currently in office. Even if the BSW were to enter the Bundestag after a recount, a parliamentary majority in favour of a different Ukraine policy and a halt to Taurus deliveries is currently unlikely. Can we change this, even if there are no elections soon? On the one hand, parliamentarians are only bound by their conscience, not their voters. On the other hand, their voters and their parties may also support the government's escalation policy ‘to defeat Putin’.
What can we do? A third of the population rejects the escalation policy, and in some constituencies, especially in the east, this is likely to be a majority. Many of them would have to change their political culture, from voters or observers to actively politically engaged citizens. Without many German citizens taking this step, we have no chance of stopping the possible, if not probable, path to a third war against Russia in 110 years.
Central demonstrations may be useful. A former SPD member of parliament who opposed the then federal government's policy of stationing US missiles in Germany in the early 1990s was unable to achieve anything in parliament with three like-minded colleagues. He concluded that only if pressure is exerted on the respective MPs in their constituencies is there a chance of persuading them to vote differently. They want to be re-elected and not be isolated in their constituencies.
To achieve this, we need a strong movement in the constituency. Critics of the federal government's policy of escalation can be found in all parties, including the governing parties.
We should therefore do the following in the constituency:
a. create a cross-party alliance of all citizens who are against the expansion of the war. We should include everyone, regardless of which party they belong to.
b. We should also leave aside differences of opinion on issues such as climate change or refugee policy and focus solely on the issue of ‘how to stop the war from spreading to Germany’.
c. Activists should network and discuss ways in which they can keep themselves as well informed as possible about the situation in Ukraine and the steps taken by the government.
d. They should find ways to pass on their own findings to citizens who have been less active or inactive so far, for example through letters to the editor and posts in regional media or social networks, or by setting up their own groups or channels on social networks.
e. Together, they should then plan and carry out high-profile actions.
f. The discussion should be brought into the parties via party members and also into organisations such as churches and trade unions. There, efforts should be made to reach resolutions calling on the central levels of the organisations to reject the policy of escalation.
g. Dialogue should then be sought with members of parliament from the constituency in the Bundestag. They can be found here: Deutscher Bundestag - Abgeordnete. You can also discuss with them the possibility of introducing an implementation law on the votes (see above) to enable the population to decide for itself on this existential question. Open letters with as many signatures as possible from the constituency could also be a good way to kick off the debate.
h. It would be good if the group also discussed the rejection of the Taurus delivery and the range clearance, as well as the planned production of war capabilities, and perhaps also worked out joint positions on conscription or rearmament.
i. It would also be good to work out possible steps ourselves, discuss them publicly and also discuss them with members of parliament.
We will stay on the ball and would like to talk to those who like these ideas and want to implement them. We could then get to know each other and learn from each other via ZOOM or personal events here at the International Peace Factory.
Kommentare